How can power cords make a difference?

702,I mostly agree with your last paragraph to me, regarding the "creative process" and older tube cicuits. There is a falacy existant that in MODERN circuits,there still is this cookbook recipie, that tubes produce coloration and sweetness and SS cicuits produce accuracy and extention at frequency extremes. Tube circuitry today can achieve sonic nuetrality should the designer wish it that way. The human voice is the most difficult thing to accurately reproduce. I have yet to hear a SS circuit (amp or preamp) get the voice as accurate as the Tube units. How do I know? We used to do live vs. recorded tests on the Ampex ATR-100 . We used flamenco guitar and voice.
The musicians themselves (amatuer) would always say when the ARC tube amps were in the chain, "Thats us". When Phase Linear, Stax, and Bryston were used (late 70s), the remarks were "thats not us anymore". Now I realize the gap has narrowed today, but not sure if it will ever be closed.And BTW, there were 3 different types of loudspeakers in the room. The results were consistant on all three.
Regarding great audio pioneers, who in your mind were they?

702, are you not also making a boastful claim when you are telling others that PCs do not make a difference. Thats a boastful claim to make about others that you know nothing about. I have no idea why one PC can sound different than another PC because unlike you I am technicality ignorant.
Do you believe that Jcbtubes, myself and others are hearing things that are not really there? Do you believe that we like spending this kind of money for PCs that are no better than a standard Beldon PC? Am I really fooling myself? I would offer you a PC that IMO makes a huge difference but I get the feeling you have a need to be right more than a need to make your system sound better. If I am wrong just let me know and I will loan you a FIM PC for two weeks. BTW 702, I picked up a couple of CDs that you recommended. They were very good, thanks.

Come on 702, the true pioneers in audio design "defined and created" electronics, acoustics, music, and psycho acoustics. For you to twist that fact and have these pioneers designing only after they learned yet undiscovered areas of electronics is, well just plan silly.
I understand you have this image of yourself as a great mind in audio, that's fine we all have our delusions. But you have no right to claim your knowledge in home audio brings you any closer to an understanding of components performance than I or others here at AudiogoN do. It sounds to me that in my 40 years I've learned more with real life practical experience than your commercial experience has taught you regarding home audio. Your delusion of grandeur over this topic is sadly misplaced, if you for one moment would open your mind to the reality of audio reproduction rather than the theory, I think you would make a great addition to this discussion. Until you are able to come down off your throne and walk with us peasants, your ideas are just that, ideas with no practical application. Thank-you for your attempts to teach us, but maybe the teachers are the masses here, maybe the student should sit down and start to listen. J.D.

I regret that I am limited to only a +2 +2 award for the above post by Jadem6.

J.D. - Your logic about the development of audio is odd. If I understand what you are saying, electronics and acoustics did not exist before advances in audio were made. Theil and Small, for example, made their contributions before the existence of loudspeakers? And they did it by dusting off their high school math books and doing a little figuring. You honestly believe that scientific and engineering ability have only played a minor role in the advancement of audio?

More importantly your post to 702 is rude. It is a personal attack. You deserve a good spanking. It is also poorly constructed. You say,"I understand you have this image of yourself as a great mind in audio". Can you justifiy this statement? You clearly resent that he tries to pass some of the simpler things he understands along, but that does not imply that he thinks he is a great mind in audio. You are just being insulting. Then you say "you have no right to claim your knowledge in home audio brings you any closer to an understanding of components performance than I or others here at AudiogoN do." First, he doesn't say this. Second, if he did, you now need to explain why someone trained in electronics would not have the right to claim more understanding of electronic components than those without training. Your justification for saying this is that YOU have the right to claim to know more because of 40 years of "experience". You accuse him of arrogance and then suggest you are the one who knows the most. "Your delusions of grandeur", do you really believe that he has delusions of grandeur or are you just being deliberately offensive? Now you switch to goobledygook. The meaningless term "reality of audio reproduction" is supposed to be more significant than theory. Did you mean "music" but wanted something that sounded fancy? You finish off with an insult ("come down off your throne"), some nonsense (your ideas are only ideas with not practical application), sarcasm ("Thank you for your attempt to teach us") and some arrogance (he should learn from people who think like you).